Clarence Mitchell-far right in Ice Cream seller's jacket
Failed Lib-Dem Parliamentary Candidate Justine McGuiness
I was always concerned about Clarence Mitchell's role as the McCann's spokesman when he appeared to be loaned by the British government shortly after Madeleine's disappearance.
Now he's turned up again, this time as "a private individual" helping them now the parents have returned to the UK.
Unlike their previous mouth, Justine McGuiness who was lawfully paid from the private company, Mitchell is being pretty coy about exactly who is signing his pay cheques.
I wonder why the cash is not coming from the Find Madeleine Fund. According to the fund's objects, I can't see any reason why. His role is exactly the same as that of McGuiness'.
Didn't they say the fund wouldn't be used to pay their legal bills? maybe Clarence is on that bit of the payroll. If so, Branson might be stumping up. I read a couple of days worth of old red-tops in a cafe the other day. Quite a shock seeing just the extent they all appear to have turned ugly on the rosy cheeked couple.
Also something occurred to me the other day ref the Langham case. If he has been looking at lots of very nasty sadistic films of children being attacked, why aren't we looking for these children, especially since there is likely to be good ID photos of them, to say the least. Am I beng naive in wondering why these two aspects: missing kiddies and paedo porn, aren't being matched up? Or are they?
Posted by: brendadada | 19 September 2007 at 06:44 PM
My guess is that it is smoke and mirrors and that he will very shortly probably return to his old job.
Posted by: trannyfattyacid | 19 September 2007 at 07:13 PM
My guess is that it is smoke and mirrors and that he will very shortly probably return to his old job.
Posted by: trannyfattyacid | 19 September 2007 at 07:14 PM
Today's El Periódico (Barcelona) is quite clear (http://tinyurl.com/34etsg):
The McCanns have a direct line to the British Prime Minister.
That PM is the Gordon Brown who made a fool of himself a few years ago about the failure of a girl to get into Oxford. She had a direct line to GB through her head teacher.
Posted by: Peter Harvey | 19 September 2007 at 07:45 PM
I thought the Clarence Mitchell chappie was the one on the far right!
Posted by: Jane | 20 September 2007 at 12:50 PM
I went to journo school with the Clarence chappie. He's definitely on the right. He was a real Smart Alec back then. He looks old (as in saggy and grey) now but then he's probably making a whole lot more dough than me. PS I work in healthcare now...newspapers suck!!!
Posted by: Karen Williams | 20 September 2007 at 09:18 PM
Thank you Karen and Jane. As you can see i've corrected the mistake.
t
Posted by: Tony Hatfield | 23 September 2007 at 11:15 AM
I second all of it, yes!
Posted by: Patricia | 24 September 2007 at 10:44 AM
Tony Hatfield is so deranged he think that somebody being a liberal democrat is somehow some terrible thing. The guy is absolutely deranged and sad.
Posted by: Jake | 06 October 2007 at 06:53 PM
I will say that I don’t quite see the relevance of Justine McGuinness’s political affiliation to this message. But in the ten years that I have known Tony Hatfield, personally as well as electronically, I have never known him suggest that my political views are ‘some terrible thing’, even when we have disagreed; nor is ‘deranged and sad’ a description of the perfectly sane and cheerful person that I know. Nameless Jake is entitled to hold his opinion about Tony’s character. It might be more valuable though, if there were any evidence that he knows Tony other than from this single post.
Posted by: Peter Harvey | 07 October 2007 at 03:03 PM